BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       


           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 225|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 225
          Author:   Kuehl (D), et al
          Amended:  8/30/01
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE  :  9-2, 4/25/01
          AYES:  Vasconcellos, Alarcon, Alpert, Karnette, O'Connell,  
            Ortiz, Scott, Sher, Vincent
          NOES:  Knight, Monteith

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  7-5, 5/14/01
          AYES:  Alpert, Burton, Escutia, Karnette, Murray, Perata,  
            Speier
          NOES:  Battin, Johannessen, Johnson, McPherson, Poochigian

           SENATE FLOOR  :  22-13, 5/17/01
          AYES:  Alpert, Bowen, Burton, Chesbro, Dunn, Figueroa,  
            Karnette, Kuehl, Murray, O'Connell, Ortiz, Peace, Perata,  
            Polanco, Romero, Scott, Sher, Soto, Speier, Torlakson,  
            Vasconcellos, Vincent
          NOES:  Ackerman, Battin, Brulte, Haynes, Johannessen,  
            Johnson, Knight, Margett, McClintock, Monteith, Morrow,  
            Oller, Poochigian

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  44-31, 9/4/01 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Education:  interscholastic athletics

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill makes a variety of changes in current  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          2

          law relative to the substance and the procedures to be  
          followed in matters of discrimination, relative to  
          interscholastic athletics.  In addition, the bill extends  
          the sunset date for the statutory authorization for the  
          California Interscholastic Federation for five years.

           Assembly amendments  make several clarifying, technical  
          changes, and add co-authors.

           ANALYSIS  :    The California Interscholastic Federation  
          (CIF) is a voluntary organization that consists of school  
          and school-related personnel with responsibility for  
          administering interscholastic athletic activities in  
          secondary schools.  It is accountable to the governing  
          boards of school districts and other local agencies.

          The State Department of Education has a variety of duties  
          and responsibilities over interscholastic athletics,  
          including the duty to insure that the policies of school  
          districts and CIF are in compliance with both state and  
          federal law.  Until 1997, absent the statutory  
          authorization for CIF, the "default" responsibility of the  
          State Department of Education was to "exercise general  
          control over all athletic activities of the public  
          schools."  Prior to the enactment of the original statutory  
          authorization in 1981, CIF existed for 67 years by letter  
          of agreement between the State Superintendent of Public  
          Instruction and CIF.

          Over the years, the statutory authorization has contained a  
          series of "sunset clauses," with various requirements to be  
          met as a condition for the sunset clauses to be extended.   
          Briefly, the legislative history includes:

          1. The current sunset date of January 1, 2002 was  
             established in 2000 (SB 1618 - O'Connell; Chapter 585,  
             Statutes of 2000).  This followed sunset dates being  
             established in 1991,1993, and 1996 (AB 273 - Clute;  
             Chapter 617/1991, AB 1375 - Collins; Chapter 487/1993,  
             and SB 237 - Lewis; Chapter 151, Statutes of 1996).

          2. The original 1981 legislation gave a statutory basis to  
             CIF, and, in combination with changes made in the 1991  
             reauthorization, set forth the responsibilities of the  







                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          3

             State Department of Education and CIF.

          3. Current law also expresses the intent of the Legislature  
             that CIF, in consultation with the State Department of  
             Education, implement the following policies:

             A.   Give the governing boards of school districts  
               specific authority to select their athletic league  
               representatives.

             B.   Require that all league, section, and state  
               meetings affiliated with CIF be subject to the notice  
               and hearing requirements of the open meetings laws  
               (the Ralph M. Brown Act).

             C.   Establish a neutral final appeals body to hear  
               complaints related to interscholastic athletic  
               policies.

          Existing law prohibits a voluntary interscholastic athletic  
          association, of which any public school is a member, from  
          discriminating against, or denying the benefits of any  
          program to, any person on the basis of race, sex, or ethnic  
          origin.

          Existing law also provides that if the State Department of  
          Education (SDE) finds that certain entities are not in  
          compliance with state or federal law, SDE may require the  
          school district, association, or consortium, or CIF to  
          adjust its policy so that it is in compliance.  SDE is  
          prohibited from determining the specific policy that must  
          be adopted in order to comply with state and federal laws.   


           This bill  makes a variety of changes in current law  
          relative to the substance and the procedures to be followed  
          in matters of discrimination, relative to interscholastic  
          athletics.  In addition, the bill extends the sunset date  
          for the statutory authorization for the California  
          Interscholastic Federation for five years.  Specifically,  
          this bill:

          1. Repeals the January 1, 2002, sunset date for the  
             statutory authorization for CIF, and establishes a new  







                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          4

             sunset date of January 1, 2007.  The bill also  
             establishes a new date for CIF to report on its  
             evaluation and accountability activities of January 1,  
             2005.

          2. Would broaden the prohibition against discrimination to  
             include, among others, discrimination on the basis of  
             religion, mental or physical disability, and any basis  
             contained in the prohibition of hate crimes, such as  
             crimes against those on the basis of race, sex, ethnic  
             origin, and sexual orientation.

          3. Requires CIF to provide information to parents and  
             pupils regarding the state and federal complaint  
             procedures for discrimination complaints in  
             interscholastic athletics.

          4. Allows a complainant from a public school who wishes to  
             file a discrimination complaint based on interscholastic  
             activities conducted by an association, by a consortium  
             of school districts, or by CIF, to file that complaint  
             directly with SDE without having to first file the  
             compliant with the school district.

          5. Authorizes SDE, if it finds an entity out of compliance  
             with state or federal law, to prescribe administrative  
             remedies that such an association, consortium of school  
             districts, or CIF must provide in order to comply with  
             state or federal law.

          6. Provides that no voluntary interscholastic athletic  
             association shall deny a school from participating in  
             interscholastic athletic activities because of the  
             religious tenets of the school, regardless of whether  
             that school is directly controlled by a religious  
             organization.

           Comments  

           Last renewal was for only one year  .  As noted earlier in  
          this Analysis, in 2000 legislation was approved that only  
          extended the statutory authorization for CIF for one year.   
          This was a compromise that was struck after agreement could  
          not be reached with the Governor relative to including  







                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          5

          additional nondiscrimination language into the  
          authorization for CIF.  The nondiscrimination proposals are  
          included in this bill, and another bill, SB 354 (Escutia),  
          provides for a five year renewal (without the  
          discrimination proposals).

           Required reports have been submitted  .  The CIF was required  
          to submit a report on its "evaluation and accountability  
          activities" pursuant to existing law by January 1, 1999.   
          These reports were a condition of the previous sunset  
          extension, and are available.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          Minor, absorbable costs.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/4/01)

          American Association of University Women
          American Civil Liberties Union
          California Alliance for Pride and Equality
          California National Organization for Women
          California Women's Law Center
          Commission on the Status of Women
          Protection and Advocacy
          Superintendent of Public Instruction, Delaine Eastin
          Western Law Center for Disability Rights
          California Teachers Association
          Women's Sports Foundation
          Association of Counsel for Children
          San Francisco Women Lawyers' Alliance
          California Association for Health, Physical Education,  
            Recreation and Dance

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  9/4/01)

          Campaign for California Families
          Committee on Moral Concerns
          Traditional Values Coalition
          Several individual letters

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    Proponents argue this bill is  
          intended to address the concerns of parents and others by  







                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          6

          ensuring that they will receive adequate notice of the  
          state and federal civil rights remedies available to them.   
          The bill also addresses concerns about the process by  
          ensuring that formal complaints may be filed directly with  
          SDE rather than with a local school district, which does  
          not actually have the authority to address multi-district  
          complaints.

          Finally, this bill prohibits discrimination in  
          interscholastic athletics on all of the same bases that  
          discrimination is currently prohibited in publicly funded  
          schools, and includes safeguards that ensure that private  
          religious schools can continue to play in interscholastic  
          athletic leagues.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    Opponents argue they believe  
          the discrimination provisions are overbroad.  In a letter  
          from the Committee on Moral Concerns, they note:  "the bill  
          will punish any school in CIF that fails to establish a  
          policy of accepting gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, along  
          with transsexuals and transvestites.  It will permit  
          complaints to be filed with SDE without even addressing the  
          local school district.  This is unfair in two ways.  First,  
          it fosters dangerous sexual behaviors.  Second, it denies  
          the accused school an opportunity to defend itself against  
          all complaints, real or imagined."  
           
           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :
          AYES:  Alquist, Aroner, Calderon, Canciamilla, Cardenas,  
            Cedillo, Chan, Chavez, Chu, Cohn, Corbett, Correa, Diaz,  
            Dutra, Firebaugh, Frommer, Goldberg, Jackson, Keeley,  
            Kehoe, Koretz, Liu, Longville, Lowenthal, Matthews,  
            Migden, Nakano, Nation, Negrete McLeod, Oropeza, Papan,  
            Pavley, Salinas, Shelley, Simitian, Steinberg,  
            Strom-Martin, Thomson, Vargas, Wayne, Wesson, Wiggins,  
            Wright, Hertzberg
          NOES:  Aanestad, Ashburn, Bates, Bogh, Briggs, Bill  
            Campbell, John Campbell, Cogdill, Cox, Daucher,  
            Dickerson, Florez, Harman, Havice, Hollingsworth, Kelley,  
            La Suer, Leach, Leonard, Leslie, Maddox, Maldonado,  
            Mountjoy, Robert Pacheco, Rod Pacheco, Pescetti, Runner,  
            Strickland, Wyland, Wyman, Zettel









                                                                SB 225
                                                                Page  
          7

          NC:sl  9/5/01   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****